What's new

2015 SCS Islands/Reefs Compare Map controlled by four nations, Amazing ~!

Mischief Reef will be the biggest island in SCS, maybe 5~6 sq.km.
View attachment 224031

This island is amazing, imagine if China build underwater structure such nuke silo or cruise missle canister launcher, conceal munitions or other military structure such command and control while the island ring act as barrier agains enemies submerines attack. :rofl:
article-2361330-1AC5B410000005DC-435_634x581.jpg

harpoon.jpg
 
. . .
Why a forceful U.S. response to China’s artificial island-building won’t float
By William Johnson
May 21, 2015

china.island-1024x657.jpg

An aerial photo taken though a glass window of a Philippine military plane shows the alleged on-going land reclamation by China on mischief reef in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, west of Palawan, Philippines, May 11, 2015. REUTERS/Ritchie B. Tongo/Pool

China’s creation of artificial islands on disputed South China Sea reefs — the actual dredging and pumping of sand, ongoing since 2014 — represents Beijing’s latest attempt to extend its territory and exert pressure over the five other countries that claim parts of the Sea. In response to the island-building, members of the U.S. defense community have in recent weeks called for the United States to get tough on China.

Earlier this month, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter asked for options for sending U.S. aircraft and ships within 12 nautical miles of the construction. In a May 13 testimony before Congress, Assistant Secretary of Defense David Shear said that the United States planned to station surveillance aircraft and long-range bombers in Australia. (He later claimed to have misspoken, after pushback from Australia.) Rear Admiral Harry Harris, Pacific Fleet Commander, plans to station three additional vessels within patrol range of the Spratly Islands — the archipelago that includes the reefs — to respond to Chinese activity there.

This approach is misguided. Neither Carter, Shear, nor PACFLEET Commander Harris appear to be taking seriously the potential for a violent response from the Chinese. The risk in pushing China too far is great, as China has demonstrated on multiple occasions, when U.S. actions led to dangerous confrontations.

American military planners’ real concern is that the Chinese will use the newly constructed islands — which certainly include a runway large enough to handle military aircraft, and may include facilities to dock military vessels — to extend the scope of their Anti-Access Area Denial (A2AD) strategy. Military installations in the South China Sea would provide platforms for land, air and sea-launched weapon systems sufficient to raise the cost of U.S. military actions in the region to prohibitive levels.

The question then becomes how best to deal with this possibility. Today the United States doesn’t have the resources in place for a major effort in the area unless it is willing to take some very great risks. The only naval vessel home-ported within patrol distance of the area is the Fort Worth, a new littoral combat ship. Otherwise, the closest assets are the ships of the U.S. 7th Fleet, based in Japan, which would have to sail through areas within the scope of China’s existing A2AD capability in order to reach the area. Ships from further away could not be used in a short engagement. A military confrontation holds little prospect of success.

In order to justify an aggressive approach, the United States must determine that the creation of these islands is threatening some vital U.S. interest. The claim that the new islands are disrupting the United States’ freedom of navigation is a red herring. To date, China has done nothing in the South China Sea to disrupt shipping. It has countered activities by other countries who assert their ownership and control in the region, notably Vietnam and the Philippines, and has asserted its own ownership and control by intercepting fishing vessels and placing oil rigs in the area. Yet none of these actions have disrupted shipping in the region. It is disingenuous for the United States to claim that by using military force to counter the island-building, it is asserting the freedom of international shipping to sail close to rocks and submerged reefs — an action no merchant vessel is likely to take.

Another flawed justification for U.S. military involvement is to defend peace and stability in the region. There have so far been no major military confrontations in the disputes between the five other countries that lay claims to the South China Sea. Journalists as well as President Obama argue that this is simply because the smaller countries are afraid to confront China due to an imbalance in military might. While this imbalance exists, it isn’t a reason for the United States to step in. The United States has taken no position on any of the territorial claims, and has urged the parties to settle their disagreements peacefully. As long as the disputing countries are not coming to blows, the United States would be rash to risk a fight with a nuclear-armed China over China’s pursuit of its claims.

A final hollow justification for military action is that the United States needs to reassure its partners and allies in the region. The only U.S. ally that is a party to the dispute is the Philippines, which should need little reassurance; after 9/11 U.S. troops spent more than a decade on the ground in the Philippines conducting Operation Enduring Freedom-Philippines to help the country rid itself of the terrorist threat from Abu Sayyaf Group and Jemaah Islamiyah. The United States has always stood by its treaty obligations, but will not commit to defending disputed grounds in the South China Sea, because it doesn’t consider them Philippine territory.

A better approach is to strengthen American diplomatic efforts, taking full advantage of the upcoming U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, and the subsequent state visit by Chinese President Xi Jinping. China is already well-convinced that the U.S. rebalance to Asia is just a euphemism for containment. It would be unwise to take military actions that reinforce that notion.
 
.
The only naval vessel home-ported within patrol distance of the area is the Fort Worth, a new littoral combat ship. Otherwise, the closest assets are the ships of the U.S. 7th Fleet, based in Japan, which would have to sail through areas within the scope of China’s existing A2AD capability in order to reach the area. Ships from further away could not be used in a short engagement. A military confrontation holds little prospect of success.
So, to my Viet and Pinoy friends, in other words, it is just a lot of hot air from the Americans.

The claim that the new islands are disrupting the United States’ freedom of navigation is a red herring. To date, China has done nothing in the South China Sea to disrupt shipping. It has countered activities by other countries who assert their ownership and control in the region, notably Vietnam and the Philippines, and has asserted its own ownership and control by intercepting fishing vessels and placing oil rigs in the area. Yet none of these actions have disrupted shipping in the region. It is disingenuous for the United States to claim that by using military force to counter the island-building, it is asserting the freedom of international shipping to sail close to rocks and submerged reefs — an action no merchant vessel is likely to take.
No country is more concerned about freedom of navigation in the SCS than China, Japan and South Korea. Nah, definitely not the Americans, who are using this red herring to edge on the Viets and Pinoys as it costs the US nothing.

after 9/11 U.S. troops spent more than a decade on the ground in the Philippines conducting Operation Enduring Freedom-Philippines to help the country rid itself of the terrorist threat from Abu Sayyaf Group and Jemaah Islamiyah.
Ha ha. Didn't the Philippines loose about 50 commandos recently in Mindanao due to the advice of their American "military experts"?
 
Last edited:
.
US Navy P-8 Poseidon flies over China's manmade islands in disputed waters

US Navy footage from onboard a P-8 Poseidon Spy Plane as it flies over manmade islands claimed by China and it's neighbors.

The P-8A is derived from the Boeing 737. It is revolutionary when it comes to sensor management, data fusion, and connectivity. The challenge for operators is not having insufficient sensor performance, but rather how to manage so many capable sensors, process the information, and transmit actionable data to commanders through a variety of communications networks and datalinks.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank posted more video Thursday of the aerial patrol above the Spratly island chain which it said had been released by the U.S. Navy.

Speaking at a regular daily briefing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei reiterated Beijing's insistence on its indisputable sovereignty over the islands it has created by piling sand on top of atolls and reefs.

While saying he had no information about the reported exchange, Hong said China was "entitled to the surveillance over related airspace and sea areas so as to maintain national security and avoid any maritime accidents.

"We hope relevant countries respect China's sovereignty over the South China Sea, abandon actions that may intensify controversies and play a constructive role for regional peace and stability," Hong told reporters.

In Washington, Daniel Russel, the top U.S. diplomat for East Asia, said the flight of a U.S. reconnaissance plane in international airspace over the South China Sea was a regular and appropriate occurrence. He said the U.S. will seek to preserve the ability of not just the United States but all countries to exercise their rights to freedom of navigation and overflight.

"Nobody in their right mind is going to try to stop the U.S. Navy from operating. That would not be a good step. But it's not enough that a U.S. military plane can overfly international waters, even if there is a challenge or a hail and query" from the Chinese military, he said.

"We believe that every country and all civilian actors also should have unfettered access to international waters and international airspace," he said.

China's construction has intensified frictions among competing parties in the South China Sea, which Beijing claims virtually in its entirety along with its scattered island groups. The area that is home to some of the world's busiest commercial shipping routes is also claimed in part or in whole by the Philippines, Taiwan, Brunei, Malaysia and Vietnam.

The U.S. and most of the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations want a halt to the projects, which they suspect are aimed at building islands and other land features over which China can claim sovereignty and base military assets.

The U.S. says it takes no position on the sovereignty claims but insists they must be negotiated. Washington also says ensuring maritime safety and access is a U.S. national security priority.

China is also at odds with Japan over ownership of a group of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea that are controlled by Tokyo but also claimed by Beijing, leading to increased activity by Chinese planes and ships in the area, which lies between Taiwan and Okinawa.

Both sides have accused the other of operating dangerously, prompting fears of an incident such as the 2001 collision between a Chinese fighter jet and a U.S. surveillance plane in which the Chinese pilot was killed and the American crew detained on China's Hainan island.

Read more at
Embedded media from this media site is no longer available
 
.
So, to my Viet and Pinoy friends, in other words, it is just a lot of hot air from the Americans.


No country is more concerned about freedom of navigation in the SCS than China, Japan and South Korea. Nah, definitely not the Americans, who are using this red herring to edge on the Viets and Pinoys as it costs the US nothing.


Ha ha. Didn't the Philippines loose about 50 commandos recently in Mindanao due to the advice of their American "military experts"?

44 but no american involvement it was ambush of the MILF and their fellow BIFF well the commanders anyway since they have families on both BIFF and the Abus
 
. . .
44 but no american involvement it was ambush of the MILF and their fellow BIFF well the commanders anyway since they have families on both BIFF and the Abus

Why are you bothering replying to them?

Isn't it obvious they are mocking the dead commandos? Didn't one PDF Chinese member who goes by the username "The Matador" as well as others already shown that the Chinese are willing to mock other countries' dead soldiers/commandos/police?
 
.
FM Spokesman affirms Hoang Sa as an inseparable territory of VN
10:43 | 22/05/2015
VGP - Hoang Sa (Paracel Islands) archipelago is an inseparable territory of Viet Nam and its waters have been the traditional fishing grounds of Vietnamese fishermen for centuries.

FM.jpg


FM’s Spokesman Le Hai Binh made that statement on May 21 in respond to the question on Viet Nam’s measures to protect its fishermen when China unilaterally bans fishing in the East Sea on May 16.


Viet Nam’s functional agencies will strengthen management and supervision on fishermen’s fishing activities in the waters of Viet Nam to promptly deal with emergent and arising cases.

Regarding to Viet Nam’s response to China’s large-scale construction on reef islands violating Viet Nam’s sovereignty over Truong Sa (Spratly) archipelago and bringing a tourist vessel to Hoang Sa archipelago, the spokesman asserted that Viet Nam has full legal foundations and historical evidence to prove its sovereignty on Hoang Sa archipelago.

All actions of parties at the area without Viet Nam’s permission are illegal and void, he added.
Mentioning to Viet Nam’s viewpoint on Chinese naval ships warning US aircraft flying above the international waters of the East Sea, Mr. Binh affirmed that the East Sea area is a crucial marine route and air corridor in the world.

The maintenance of marine and aeronautical peace, stability, security and safety in the East Sea is the joint benefit and aspiration of nations in and outside the region, he added.

We call all related nations to make active and responsible contribution to maintaining maritime and aviation peace, stability, security and safety in the East Sea as well as respect sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction of coastal nations based on international law and the United Nations on the Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, he said.

By Thuy Dung
 
.
Why are you bothering replying to them?

Isn't it obvious they are mocking the dead commandos? Didn't one PDF Chinese member who goes by the username "The Matador" as well as others already shown that the Chinese are willing to mock other countries' dead soldiers/commandos/police?

Its for the Non imperialist next i just post i know your right kabayan this put@ng in@'s will just mock us let them
 
. . . .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom